TheWaytoYahuweh@TheWaytoYahuweh Pt 1 a false prophet is anyone who teaches away from Torah Deut 13:1-10, Paul did this Acts 21:21 & Acts 21:28. Pt 2 Yeshua the seven lamp stands" of "seven churches" in Revelation. Pt 3 Peter is not first pope. Paul is code name for Simon Magus. Pt4 Paul, aka Apollonius “Apollos” 1 Corth 3:4-6 Pt5 Aegae was an ancient Greek city in Aeolis (part of modern North-West Turkey). Pt 6 How about the word “Temples?” (to be continued) See my site lasttrumpet org Paul is a Pharisse
douglasnvideo@douglasnvideo Paul was accused of teaching against Torah, yet none of those people there in Acts 21:28 brought any evidence that he had done so. Your reply to pt2 doesn't make sense. I never said Peter was the first pope, and Simon Magnus is not a code name for Paul or vice-versa. I showed that Apollonius and Paul aren't the same as you incorrectly claim. I already pointed out where Aegae actually was. And Apollonius visited Temples, he didn't 'plant' any. I suggest you re-read the thread again
TheWaytoYahuweh@TheWaytoYahuweh In Acts 21:21 Paul taught away from circumcision. Paul was charged with teaching people away from the law.That punishment is for death and why the wanted to stone Paul. See Acts 23:30. I proved from 1st Cor 3:3-6 Apollos is speaking of Apollonius. From Codex Bezae scholars also agree that the name "Apollos" is indeed "Apollonius." And that Apollonius had visited Corinth and established a church/school there, according to all historical records of the time. Paul is Apollonius.
douglasnvideo@douglasnvideo Are we reading the same thing? Acts 21:21 isn't Paul saying anything, so how can he be the one teaching away from circumcision? Stephen in Acts 6-7 was also accused of doing something that Paul is also accused of, yet no one brought any proof of their accusations - just like you. And what 'historical' records are you referring to regarding Apollonius? The only one we actually have is the Life of, which mentions nothing of him establishing anything in Corinth. What is your source?
Furthermore, Bezae is but one manuscript, from the FIFTH CENTURY CE. This makes it about as authoritative as the Textus Receptus (that is, not authoritative in the slightest). Saying that, I actually haven't seen where Bezae supposedly has Apollonius rather than Apollos. Do you have an image for us all to clarify this?
TheWaytoYahuweh@TheWaytoYahuweh James already knew the answer to James question to Paul in Acts 21:21 " Paul never denied it." The Jews at the Temple who heard Paul teach said Paul taught away from the law. Jews don’t bring up charges against someone lightly, they know the recourse for bringing up false charges.Paul in Acts 15:2, is still bothered by the circumcision issue. 1st Cor 3:3-6 Apollos is speaking of Apollonius. From Codex Bezae scholars also agree that the name "Apollos" is indeed "Apollonius."
douglasnvideo@douglasnvideo Why are you just repeating yourself? I mentioned the charges the Jews brought against Stephen in Acts 6-7; he never denied them yet Luke feels the need to call them "false witnesses" Acts 6:13. Seems to me that these Jews were lying, as were the ones who were spreading the false rumour that Paul taught the Jews not to circumcise their children. Further evidence that they were lying is that they'd said that Paul had taken a Gentile into the Temple, although he hadn't.
Furthermore, if scholars did 'agree' that Apollos should be Apollonius, then those that do the Nestle-Aland and UBS Greek NT's haven't been convinced, for Acts 18:24 still has Απολλως. As I said - Bezae has no authority here. You also haven't answered most of my other points I pointed out: where's Demas? What is your source for Apollonius planting a school in Corinth or anywhere else? Where are these wild beasts he fought? All you are doing is lying, nothing more; nothing less
svgrobski@TheWaytoYahuweh Is Paul a Pharisee? Game over!
@douglasnvideo How can Paul be both Apollonius and a pharisee?
Edit#1:@douglasnvideo As svgrobski asked, how can Paul be both "Apollonius" AND a "Pharisee"? He's either one or the other - he can't be both (especially as Apollonius is never said to have come into contact with a Jew of any kind). You're also not answering a single thing I've said. You have provided no source for anything at all. You are a liar and a coward, Douglas. I say a coward because despite all the evidence, you still refuse to recant your lies, like all cowards do. I suggest you read Rev 21:8
@TheWaytoYahuweh Is Paul a Pharisee?
Edit #2:@douglasnvideo No. He's dead - he's not really alive to 'be' anything. Was Nicodemus a Pharisee? How about Joseph of Arimathea? How about those mentioned in Acts 15:1 & 5? Are you an American? Do you live in California?
If you want, I've got several other non-important questions I could ask you. You on the other hand need to answer my points properly, and provide a source for your claims. Or be brave, and admit that you're wrong. Research properly next time, so you won't be shown up.
It is a very important question. Is Paul a Pharisee?
Edit #3:As you haven't answered a single one of my questions (all of which were asked before this current regurgitation on your part) or brought forth any source for your claims, I don't see a need to answer anything else you ask of me.
Furthermore, the Messiah warned us against the doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees - not individual Pharisees or Sadducees. And as it happens, Paul didn't expound any Pharisaical or Sadducean doctrine, so your question isn't important at all.
I have answered your questions. When it comes to answering my questions you are always evasive and it’s telling. Anyone following this tread can see that. Paul professed being an apostle, there are only 12 apostles, Rev 21:14 Paul is a liar. Paul as a teacher, professed being a Pharisee, a few times.(Phl 3:5; as touching the law, a Pharisee;) We are commanded by Yeshua to reject all Pharisaic teachers. James with letters of the Dead Sea Scrolls called Paul " A spouter of lies."
Apollonius AKA Saul converted to Pharisaic Judaism as he aspired to marry the High Priests daughter (She had a huge dowry). She refused to marry Saul. Paul was reported being bitter about having to be circumcised. The Pharisees teaches a lesser Torah for the gentiles called the Noahide laws. Paul taught a lesser Torah and got Paul in trouble see. Acts 21:21 Acts 21:28 God's Torah teaches there is just one Torah for everyone. Exodus 12:49. James called Paul, "a spouter of lies."
Edit #4:No you haven't. Not a single one. Where is your answer to my question of where 'Demas' is in Apollonius' story? Where is your answer to where I asked you to provide evidence for Apollonius starting a 'school' in Corinth? Where is your answer of providing an image of Codex Bezae having Απολλωνιος rather than Απολλως? These are but a few of the questions I asked you which you haven't answered. There's also points 7-14 in the thread for you to even attempt an answer at.
The liar and coward here is you. Your entire video here is wrong because you didn't bother actually doing any "research" - you just repeated other peoples lies and fraudulent statements. The Messiah didn't mention anything about Pharisaic "teachers", not to mention that both Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were Pharisees, and Luke in Acts 15:5 mentions many Pharisees as being members of the early Ecclesia.
The Dead Sea Scrolls non-Biblical manuscripts predate both James and Paul's *births* by 50-100 years. James doesn't ever refer to Paul as "a spouter of lies". Several Jews falsely accused Paul of things he hadn't said or done, the same way that they had done previously with Stephen and the Messiah Himself. And you should really not read anything written by Robert Eisenman. He's as a big a liar and fraud as the Pope. Stop spouting lies, and stop repeating other peoples lies too.
I've also given more than enough evidence to destroy this supposed Apollonius-Paul myth and fraud that you are promoting here. For those who've yet to realise how wrong Douglas here is, I suggest you pop over to tinyurl com / 8ysqd5y and read the thread there. I am also posting all the comments from here there as well, so you can read them in context and see that Douglas hasn't replied to anything properly.
None of the apostles of Yeshua are of Pharisees! Yeshua taught and warned about Pharisaic teachings in lots of places. Matt 16:12 beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Paul is a Pharisee and never stopped professed being one.. Botton line, Matthew 5:20"For I say to you, that unless your righteousness (true Torah only observance) exceeds the righteousness (of Oral Tradition teachers) of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven
Why are you repeating things I've already stated? I'd already said the following: "Furthermore, the Messiah warned us against the doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees" however, as stated previously, he didn't speak against individual Pharisees or Sadducees themselves. I also never said that the 'apo9stles' were Pharisees - I mention Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea as Pharisees, which Matt, Mark, Luke and John make very clear to us.
I am working on a responsey to your remarks. You F up big time! Also I have easily proven you a liar; I can't wait to post it. I am a busy person. Look for it to be posted soon.
Here's hoping this isn't just a fob off. I was getting tied of not being able to do fuller replies, and it would be good to have something longer to respond toI too am a busy person; I await your actual response.
Right you are, you never said any of the apostles are Pharisees. That’s is my point. So what if it states Nicodemus is a Pharisee. What is your point? Yeshua told Nicodemais to repent. Paul claimed to be a Pharisee, Phil 3:5 personally trained by Gamaliel, puffed up about that fact. (Acts 22:3 Under Gamaliel I was thoroughly trained in the law of our fathers ) Paul the Pharisee ran around teaching people fasley and that got Paul into a lot of trouble for Paul's false teachings
As I said, I await your actual response. YouTube comments aren't long enough for a proper discussion to be had. I will add however that the Messiah never told Nicodemus to repent, or stop being a Pharisee. You can also answer that in your much fuller response that everyone who's been following this is anticipating. Discussions are much better when there isn't a 500 character limit
It's also amazing how people who oppose this view are instantly cast and attacked as pro-paul.
Calling yourself an "expert" is quite funny here. You're no expert on anything, which everyone who reads your post and watches your YT vids are able to see.Shalom, my name is Pastor Douglas Nicholson. I am the author of the YT video called “PAUL THE FALSE APOSTLE "THE BIG TEST" from God” I am an expert on the false apostle Paul.
First of all, it's either "Stephen" or "Swalchy" - not "Mr" anything.I am going to bring Mr Swalchy arguments to a quick close here.
As Rob foretold above, your first accusation against me for pointing out your flaws is to attack me for being "pro-Paul", when I'm not. I'm pro telling the truth and using facts and evidence to prove what I say, regardless of whom it's about.Mr Swalchy is puffed up like the false apostle Paul. Mr Swalchy who is pro Pauline and is going to follow Paul into hell if Mr Swalchy does not repent of his ways. Because of Mr Swalchy is taking a pro Paul position and he thinks he can challenge things that I had brought up on my YT study about Paul. http://youtu.be/9npnLdwdjUU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Mr Swalchy has a lot of talking points and I will address them as I can. For now I will just deal with point one, what is a false prophet.
You don't go into "great detail" now, do you? A 10 min long video isn't "great" nor "detailed". You are bigging yourself up with a delusion of grandeur, and yet you have the audacity to refer to me as "puffed up"? How hypocritical of you.What is a false prophet? I go into great detail at the start of my YT video and explain this clearly and cite Bible Scripture.
Let's have an actual look at your Scripture quote here, shall we?The charges brought against Paul was for “teaching away from” keeping of the commandments of God and that’s what makes Paul a false prophet. Deut 13:1-10. This is a capital crime and punishment is by death.
Again with the false accusations. I'm not misleading anyone, because I actually point people to the source of my answers so they can read them for themselves.Mr. Swalchy is trying to mislead you big time against me and I can prove this. Once you see this fact you will know the rest of Mr. Swalchy points are crappy and divisive as well.
You actually haven't proved that a false prophet isn't just someone who makes false prophecies and seduces people to follow the gods of the people surrounding Israel. You need to do that first of all.There are a couple of categories of a false prophets found in Torah. A false prophet can be one who’s a prediction doesn’t come true but this not what Paul is being charged with?
Which isn't in the category of "false prophet". The charge against Paul is false anyway.Paul is being charge with teaching people away from keeping the commandments of God.
Deuteronomy 13 begs to differ.Acts 21:21 & Acts 21:28 A passage used from Torah for those who predictions don’t come true is from Deuteronomy 18:22" when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. (This is not a capital crime; you are just not to respect “fear” the prophet of false predictions)
All that's been proven is that you appear to have an inability to read. Also if my point #1 is wrong (which it isn't), you have yet to even bother to answer the other 13 points I have noted down above, so it's presumptuous for you to dismiss them just because you think I don't know what Scripture says regarding false prophets.So Mr. Swalchy now been proven wrong on his first point and sets the tone for his other bogus points.
As I pointed out in the YouTube comments, Stephen in Acts 6-7 was also accused of doing the same thing that Paul was: “This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the Torah, for we have heard him say that this Yahushua of Nazareth shall destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.” He never denies these charges either, yet Luke still calls those who state this "false witnesses", because that's what they were - false witnesses.Now proving Paul the false prophet for “teaching away from Torah” which is a capital crime of which Paul is being charged with.
Here we read where James, the brother of our Lord is asking Paul about Paul’s false teachings. James already knows the answers to his question and wants to see if Paul will deny it in any fashion.
Acts 21:21 "but they have been informed about you (Paul) that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses (the law), saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs."
Paul is so busted for teaching away from the commandments of God and Paul never denied it.
They also make this accusation again in Acts 24:1-9: And after five days the high priest Ananias came down with some elders and a spokesman, one Tertullus. They laid before the governor their case against Paul. And when he had been summoned, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying: “Since through you we enjoy much peace, and since by your foresight, most excellent Felix, reforms are being made for this nation, in every way and everywhere we accept this with all gratitude. But, to detain you no further, I beg you in your kindness to hear us briefly. For we have found this man a plague, one who stirs up riots among all the Jews throughout the world and is a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. He even tried to profane the temple, but we seized him. By examining him yourself you will be able to find out from him about everything of which we accuse him.” The Jews also joined in the charge, affirming that all these things were so.Paul is also busted in the Temple by eye and ear witnesses, Jews from Asia who heard Paul teach there.
Acts 21:27 Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him (Paul) in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him (Paul), Act 21:28crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man (Paul) who teaches all men everywhere against the people(the Jews), the law(Torah), and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place."
Act 21:29(For they had previously seen Trophimus (the gentile) the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
Actually, the Greek of Romans 10:4 is to be translated: For Messiah is an ordinance's aim, goal and purpose on behalf of righteousness to everyone who trusts and relies in the trustworthy. As there is no definite article before the noun νομος in the Greek text, it can not mean "the" law.You can read where the eye and ear witness are bringing up false prophet charges against Paul. Also you can never bring gentiles into the Temple back then and even in the future, read (Ezekiel 44:9 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "No foreigner, uncircumcised in heart (one has to be Torah observant) or uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter My sanctuary, including any foreigner who is among the children of Israel.) We also can easily infer from Ezekiel 44:9 that the law has not been done away with as Paul falsely teaches in (Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.)
There were no eye or ear witnesses to these things, and Paul's writings don't teach against the Torah. You also have yet to show that a false prophet is one who teaches against keeping the commandments of God.So we have eye and ear witnesses against Paul and also Paul’s writings that testifying against Paul as being a false prophet who teaches away from keeping the commandments of God. This is capital crime.
It's quite obvious that I'm not trying to mislead anyone. And thanks for the warning - I suggest that you take heed on your own words.Mr Swalchy is trying to mislead you by lying about what charges are brought up against Paul the false apostle of Rev 2:2. The punishment for lying under oath Mr Swalchy is very serious one and all Torah observant people know this.
As I noted in the YT comments, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were both Pharisees too. Plus Luke also records this in Acts 15:5: But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees... Whilst it is true that the Messiah commanded the disciples to 'beware' of the Teachings of the Pharisees (and Sadducees), he says nothing about the Pharisees as individual people. This is proven by the fact that Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, Paul, and several others were still 'Pharisees' even after coming to trust in Yahushua.Paul is a Pharisee, the Lord commands us to reject all teachings of all the Pharisees. Are you doing this?
You haven't proven anything, Douglas, other than the fact that you are incapable of reading things thoroughly.So for point one I have proven that Mr. Swalchy is trying to mislead people.
If you could do that Will and bring us your thoughts and findings on this forum (pro/against or whatever), I know Stephen and myself would be very thankful. Stephen put a load of time into his dissection of Galatians in that document and I think other than myself (I think I might have even asked the question in the first place) and some close friends, no one has tried to refute or confirm anything in it. It is a long and technical document so maybe that's where people are scared away, understandably.I will look further into the Great Galatians Debate and if I am convinced that it is a fraud I will discontinue the use thereof.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests